Yorgos Lanthimos’s The Killing of a Sacred Deer is a haunting psychological thriller that blends myth, morality, and surreal horror into a disturbingly clinical tale of consequence. With its ambiguous ending, icy performances, and eerie dialogue, the film unsettles viewers long after the credits roll. At its core, The Killing of a Sacred Deer asks a harrowing question: What does justice look like when guilt is inescapable, but the punishment must be chosen?
Plot Summary: A Tragedy Wrapped in Cold Precision
Dr. Steven Murphy (Colin Farrell) is a successful heart surgeon who lives a seemingly idyllic life with his wife Anna (Nicole Kidman) and their two children, Kim and Bob. But things take a sinister turn when Steven forms a secretive friendship with a teenage boy named Martin (Barry Keoghan). Gradually, it’s revealed that Martin’s father died during a surgery performed by Steven one in which Steven had been drinking beforehand. While not legally charged, Steven is morally culpable.
Martin, who initially seems awkward and strange, reveals a chilling truth: Steven must choose one member of his family to die to atone for the death of Martin’s father. If he doesn’t make a choice, all of them—his wife, daughter, and son—will die, each succumbing to a mysterious, escalating illness that begins with paralysis and ends in death. The ultimatum, given without explanation or supernatural context, takes the family into a downward spiral of fear, betrayal, and madness.
The Ending: Sacrificial Resolution
In the film’s brutal and surreal climax, Steven blindfolds himself, spins in a circle with a rifle, and fires randomly until one of his family members—his son Bob—is killed. It’s an arbitrary, chaotic resolution to a moral dilemma that defies logic. In the final scene, the surviving Murphys (Steven, Anna, and Kim) encounter Martin in a diner. No words are exchanged. Martin silently acknowledges them and walks away. The Murphys leave, hollow and numb, their family shattered forever.
This ending provides no relief, only a twisted sense of balance. Justice has been “served” but at what cost?
Key Themes: Guilt, Justice, and the Price of Inaction
1. Guilt
Steven’s denial of responsibility is at the heart of the film. He insists the death of Martin’s father was a “mistake,” refusing to confront the moral weight of his negligence. His guilt manifests externally through Martin’s supernatural retribution. In Lanthimos’s world, guilt cannot be ignored—it demands a price.
2. Justice
Martin’s demand is ritualistic, like an eye for an eye taken to a grotesque extreme. There is no legal justice in the film—only personal and divine. The idea that Steven must choose who dies to restore balance is a perverse twist on justice, where moral order must be reestablished by a horrifying personal sacrifice.
3. Sacrifice
At the film’s center lies the concept of sacrificial death. Steven must willingly offer one of his loved ones to appease a cosmic imbalance—just as ancient kings were expected to sacrifice for the sins of their people. His random killing mirrors the senselessness of fate, and highlights the inability to rationalize or control the consequences of guilt.
Mythological Parallels: The Story of Iphigenia
The title The Killing of a Sacred Deer references the Greek myth of Iphigenia, the daughter of Agamemnon. In the myth, Agamemnon kills a sacred deer belonging to the goddess Artemis. In retaliation, Artemis halts the Greek fleet with unfavorable winds, demanding the sacrifice of Iphigenia for the ships to sail. Agamemnon, torn between duty and love, ultimately agrees to the sacrifice.
Steven mirrors Agamemnon: a man trapped in an impossible dilemma, punished by a higher power for a moral failure. Martin, like Artemis, serves as a cold arbiter of divine retribution, holding no sympathy for the innocent lives at stake. Bob, the sacrificed son, becomes the Iphigenia figure killed not for his own sins, but for his father’s.
This mythological framework adds a ritualistic quality to the story, transforming a modern tragedy into something timeless and archetypal.
Symbolism and Character Analysis
Martin as Divine Punisher
Martin is not presented as a supernatural being, but he defies explanation. His calm demeanor, cryptic language, and absolute control over events suggest a symbolic role: the embodiment of consequence, fate, or karma. He does not physically cause harm—he simply observes, declares, and waits. His moral compass is rigid, amoral, and terrifying in its precision.
Steven as Rational Hubris
Steven represents modern rationalism and arrogance. He believes in science, reason, and professional distance. Yet his inability to emotionally process guilt or accept moral responsibility leads to chaos. His clinical coldness makes the family’s collapse feel even more terrifying.
The Family as Casualties of Denial
Anna, Kim, and Bob each react differently to their impending doom. Anna becomes pragmatic and manipulative. Kim, drawn to Martin in a twisted crush, tries to sacrifice herself for love. Bob regresses to childish dependence. Each character embodies a different response to powerlessness none of which prevent the inevitable.
Yorgos Lanthimos’s Style and the Film’s Unsettling Tone
Lanthimos is known for his detached, absurdist storytelling (The Lobster, Dogtooth), and The Killing of a Sacred Deer is no exception. The film’s flat, monotone dialogue, wide-angle cinematography, and ominous score contribute to a mood of suffocating dread. The characters behave oddly, emotionally disconnected from their surroundings—making the horror feel both alien and disturbingly human.
The lack of exposition or emotional outbursts makes the film feel like a nightmare that can’t be rationalized. Lanthimos constructs a world where rules exist, but they are never explained. Viewers, like the characters, are left groping in the dark for meaning.
The Ambiguous Ending: What Does It Mean?
The final scene in the diner offers no catharsis. The family is visibly traumatized, and Martin seems unbothered. They’ve paid the price, but nothing is restored—not love, not happiness, not even clarity. The encounter feels more transactional than redemptive. There’s no forgiveness—just the cold continuation of life.
Some interpretations suggest the diner scene symbolizes the new reality: a silent acknowledgment of the past, but with no hope of reconciliation. Others argue that the film critiques the moral hypocrisy of a society that refuses accountability until forced by external judgment.
Conclusion: What The Killing of a Sacred Deer Says About Morality and Consequence
Ultimately, The Killing of a Sacred Deer is a modern tragedy disguised as a psychological horror film. It explores what happens when guilt is unacknowledged, justice is arbitrary, and morality is reduced to a transactional sacrifice. The film doesn’t offer comfort or clarity. Instead, it asks us to confront the cold machinery of consequence when human empathy fails.
Lanthimos uses myth to hold up a mirror to modern hubris reminding us that some mistakes demand a price that logic cannot reason away. In his world, the sacred deer will always be avenged.